John Levine wrote:
> How is this different from everyone's favorite alleged mailing list
> solution?
>
> From: Foo list on behalf of Jane Smith <[email protected]>
...
> PS: well, other than it's a little more explicit about where the
> responsibility lies
That is the difference.
I'd prefer:
From: Foo list [Jane Smith] <[email protected]>
CC: Jane Smith <[email protected]>
as "on behalf of" is a little too verbose but, yes, making sure that the
distinction remains generally visible without:
- becoming extremely inconvenient (private replies become impossible because
the author's email address is missing), or
- violating the principle of least astonishment[1] (wait, the list operator
caused my private reply to be routed through his mail-server?)
is the point.
- Roland
1: Reply-To: appears to have become a third rail, I won't touch it.
_______________________________________________
dmarc-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.dmarc.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc-discuss
NOTE: Participating in this list means you agree to the DMARC Note Well terms
(http://www.dmarc.org/note_well.html)
